• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT7| Notorious R.B.G. Plans NZ Tour

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Wilsongt

Member
Glitchfire said:
Gay marriage was declared constitutional by the Supreme Court. Trump is pro-LGBT. What else are you looking for to get out of Hillary? Don't think you will find it.
Click to expand...

Are you posting this stuff ironically? Or are you trying rile someone up? If so
2986231-you-re-gonna-need-a-bigger-bait.jpg
 
U

User 463088

Banned
Wilsongt said:
Are you posting this stuff ironically? Or are you trying rile someone up? If so
2986231-you-re-gonna-need-a-bigger-bait.jpg
Click to expand...

Girl, didn't you know the entire gay rights movement was about acceptance of marriage equality? Us getting fired....denied rentals....using bathrooms if you happen to be on the T part of the beautiful QUILTBAG....that ain't not no thang. Just marriage.
 
A

ampere

Member
"States' rights" is pretty much the Republican platform for any civil rights issues, if not a "no" altogether on the federal level.
 
R

Rebel Leader

THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
ampere said:
"States' rights" is pretty much the Republican platform for any civil rights issues, if not a "no" altogether on the federal level.
Click to expand...

but fuck the local city rights eh?

adam387 said:
Girl, didn't you know the entire gay rights movement was about acceptance of marriage equality? Us getting fired....denied rentals....using bathrooms if you happen to be on the T part of the beautiful QUILTBAG....that ain't not no thang. Just marriage.
Click to expand...



How could you forget the most important issue?
Cakes
 
S

SheSaidNo

Member
pigeon said:
My source is a lot better sourced. Also knows how to spell "sloping."
Click to expand...

You could just go to the dudes page that did the second study
http://cis.org/immigration-and-the-american-worker-review-academic-literature

Findings from Recent Studies: Could All Americans Gain from Immigration?

Some research argues that virtually all American workers gain from immigration because immigrants and native workers with the same level of education and age do not compete with each other, but in fact complement each other. Although the early empirical studies that examined this assumption claimed that there were substantial complementarities, the published version of these studies reports much weaker, if any, complementarities (Ottaviano and Peri, 2006 and 2012; Borjas, Grogger, and Hanson, 2012).

In fact, even if the extent of complementarity is at the upper end of the estimated range in the most recent studies, immigration still reduced the wage of native high school dropouts by between 2 to 5 percent (depending on whether the effect is measured in the long run or the short run).

Some studies also argue that native high school dropouts and high school graduates are interchangeable in the workplace (Card, 2009; Ottaviano and Peri, 2012). If true, the impact of immigration on the relative size of the low-skill workforce is small and the wage impact of immigration is correspondingly small. The data, however, do not provide convincing evidence that high school dropouts and high school graduates are, in fact, interchangeable (Borjas, Grogger, and Hanson, 2012).

Measuring the Effects of Immigration Directly

Early research measuring the labor market impact of immigration focused on comparing outcomes in different cities. This approach is now seen as inadequate because the movement of goods, labor, and capital tends to diffuse the impact of immigration across the country.

Classifying workers by education level and age and comparing differences across groups over time shows that a 10 percent increase in the size of an education/age group due to the entry of immigrants (both legal and illegal) reduces the wage of native-born men in that group by 3.7 percent and the wage of all native-born workers by 2.5 percent.

The results from the education/age comparisons align well with what is predicted by economic theory. Further support for the results from the education/age comparisons can be found in studies using the same method in other countries.
Click to expand...

I don't think immigration should be reduced at all however, but it does impact wages
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
Rebel Leader said:
but fuck the local city rights eh?
Click to expand...

This was the thing that made me realize that "states rights" was just a smokescreen, tbh. If states are supposed to be better at governing because they're closest to their people, then logically cities would be the best governments of all, no? But there's a notable LACK of support for Urban Rights (is that the term?) in the Republican base. Funny how that is.
 
R

Rebel Leader

THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
Poodlestrike said:
This was the thing that made me realize that "states rights" was just a smokescreen, tbh. If states are supposed to be better at governing because they're closest to their people, then logically cities would be the best governments of all, no? But there's a notable LACK of support for Urban Rights (is that the term?) in the Republican base. Funny how that is.
Click to expand...

Funny indeed
 
D

Dubbedinenglish

Banned
Poodlestrike said:
This was the thing that made me realize that "states rights" was just a smokescreen, tbh. If states are supposed to be better at governing because they're closest to their people, then logically cities would be the best governments of all, no? But there's a notable LACK of support for Urban Rights (is that the term?) in the Republican base. Funny how that is.
Click to expand...

Urban areas are where all the welfare queens live!
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
I remember when Borjas was the adviser for a white supremacist who argued that we should stop immigration from Mexico because Mexicans had low IQs.

I also remember when Borjas, last year, faked a paper to get poor results regarding immigration.

Some of Borjas' work is fine, but he clearly has a certain viewpoint that he tries to push no matter what.
 
G

Glitchfire

Banned
ampere said:
"States' rights" is pretty much the Republican platform for any civil rights issues, if not a "no" altogether on the federal level.
Click to expand...

What is wrong with this?

Maximizes the social utility of everyone. Country would be a lot less divided if these were the case. Having societal norms be the same in Alabama & California is unnecessary.
 
K

kess

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
I remember when Borjas was the adviser for a white supremacist who argued that we should stop immigration from Mexico because Mexicans had low IQs.

I also remember when Borjas, last year, faked a paper to get poor results regarding immigration.

Some of Borjas' work is fine, but he clearly has a certain viewpoint that he tries to push no matter what.
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware of Borjas until now, but it's interesting to read that a noted anti-immigration advocate is, in fact, an immigrant.
 
D

danm999

Member
Glitchfire said:
Gay marriage was declared constitutional by the Supreme Court. Trump is pro-LGBT. What else are you looking for to get out of Hillary? Don't think you will find it.
Click to expand...

Hmm.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/18/politics/donald-trump-supreme-court-nominees/

Donald Trump on Wednesday unveiled a list of 11 judges he would consider nominating to fill the seat of late Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court, an unusual move for a presidential candidate that underscores his efforts to appeal to conservatives.
Click to expand...

Steve Vladeck, a CNN contributor and law professor at American University Washington College of Law, described the list as "red meat to conservatives. These are 11 well-regarded conservative judges with consistent credentials; folks who I think could reasonably be expected to try and follow in Justice Scalia's footsteps.
Click to expand...

John Malcolm, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage foundation who compiled and published the foundation's list of eight potential Supreme Court nominees in March, called Trump's selections "excellent."
Click to expand...
 
G

Glitchfire

Banned
pigeon said:
How could I do that when you didn't link the page?

I'll take a look.
Click to expand...

You put far too much faith in the social sciences brother. Social sciences = hypothesizing based off of political biases and then selectively optimizing empirical evidence to come to a favorable conclusion.

Anyways, if you want to try to get a balanced look on illegal immigration:

http://immigration.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000788

It is funny how liberal this country has gotten over the past 8 years. Back in the 90s bill was talking about the dangers of illegal immigration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNy4ixHFrdI.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Glitchfire said:
You put far too much faith in the social sciences brother. Social sciences = hypothesizing based off of political biases and then selectively optimizing empirical evidence to come to a favorable conclusion.

Anyways, if you want to try to get a balanced look on illegal immigration:

http://immigration.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000788

It is funny how liberal this country has gotten over the past 8 years. Back in the 90s bill was talking about the dangers of illegal immigration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNy4ixHFrdI.
Click to expand...

You didn't respond to my question.

Why is Trump's overt racism not a disqualifying factor for him as a presidential candidate?
 
S

SheSaidNo

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
I remember when Borjas was the adviser for a white supremacist who argued that we should stop immigration from Mexico because Mexicans had low IQs.

I also remember when Borjas, last year, faked a paper to get poor results regarding immigration.

Some of Borjas' work is fine, but he clearly has a certain viewpoint that he tries to push no matter what.
Click to expand...

What paper? I was trying to find it and found this David Card, George Borjas, Giovanni Peri, and the Great Immigration Debate

Is this what you are talking about?
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
SheSaidNo said:
What paper? I was trying to find it and found this David Card, George Borjas, Giovanni Peri, and the Great Immigration Debate

Is this what you are talking about?
Click to expand...

I'm talking about that, yes.

We find that the main reason is the use of a small sub-sample within the group of the high school dropouts, obtained by eliminating from the sample women, non-Cuban Hispanics and selecting a short age range (25-59). All three of these restrictions are problematic and, in particular, the last two as they eliminate groups on which the effect of Mariel should have been particularly strong (Hispanic and young workers). We can replicate Borjas’ results when using this small sub-sample and the smaller March CPS, rather than the larger May-ORG CPS used by all other studies of the Boatlift. The drastic sample restrictions described above leave Borjas with only 17 to 25 observations per year to calculate average wage of high school dropouts in Miami.
Click to expand...

He stripped away everything until n=17 and he got the result he wanted. It was fucking ridiculous.

Frum's article is also.... really sexist?

But now look at what Peri and Yasenov did to make their control groups bigger. They included women. They included other recent Hispanic immigrants. And instead of counting only high school “dropouts,” they included everyone in the Department of Labor samples who had not yet finished high school—including people still currently enrolled in school!

That generated a big sample all right, but a big, worthless sample.

Men and women have different labor-market experiences. Would you expect an influx of men without high-school diplomas to affect the wages of nannies?
Click to expand...

I knew Frum was a hardcore racist, but this is pretty unexpected...
 
U

User 85168

Banned
I don't think it's been posted here, but here are the details on a new compromised gun amendment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/22/us/politics/senate-gun-control-no-fly-list-terrorism.html?smid=tw-nytpolitics&smtyp=cur

Some takeaways:

Proposed by Senators Collins and Heitkamp.

No gun sale to "no-fly" and "selectee" lists.

US Citizens and Green card holders are able to appeal after the sale has been denied, and legal fees are refunded if successful.

“I’m going to be working to make sure she gets a vote on that proposal,” - McConnell

Three other GOP senators in support: Ayotte, Flake, and Graham.
Click to expand...

I assume Kirk will vote for this too (which still won't be enough), but I have a lot of reservations on basing this off those two lists. Especially if people are only able to appeal after they have been denied. I understand we all want some form of gun control, but I would rather be starting from closing the gun show loophole. It's weird to think that the government can take away one of your rights by simply putting you on a list, and you can only appeal until you try to exercise it, even if it's one that I don't agree with at all.
 
S

SheSaidNo

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
I'm talking about that, yes.



He stripped away everything until n=17 and he got the result he wanted. It was fucking ridiculous.
Click to expand...

The article ended with this

When Borjas did his work on the Mariel Cubans, he defined a “similarly situated worker” quite precisely. He counted only men. He counted only native-born workers. And he counted only workers who’d dropped out of high school. That meant he was looking at the wages of only about two dozen people. He tried to compensate by looking at that small control group over three different year periods … but still, a small control group times three remains a small control group.

So that’s a problem.

But now look at what Peri and Yasenov did to make their control groups bigger. They included women. They included other recent Hispanic immigrants. And instead of counting only high school “dropouts,” they included everyone in the Department of Labor samples who had not yet finished high school—including people still currently enrolled in school!

That generated a big sample all right, but a big, worthless sample.

Men and women have different labor-market experiences. Would you expect an influx of men without high-school diplomas to affect the wages of nannies?

Inserting other immigrants into the control group was also distorting, in work intended to discern the effects of immigration on wages. It might, conceivably, have led to comparing some people who are driving wages down to other people who are also driving wages down.

And as for treating people who have not yet completed high school as the equivalent of high-school dropouts—that’s the most intensely dubious comparison of all.

Data mining is indeed bad. But this kind of data dredging seems far, far worse. Yet data dredging on an industrial scale seems to be the only way to rescue the Card paper from the withering criticism Borjas has offered. That’s not very reassuring from an academic point of view. And if the most important immigration-doesn’t-hurt-the-unskilled research of the past quarter-century must be rejected as hopelessly contaminated by its own sampling errors, then what is left? It’s famously said that economic science represents the triumph of pure reason over common sense. But in this case, what has triumphed over common sense is not reason, but massaged and manipulated data.
Click to expand...
 
G

Glitchfire

Banned
pigeon said:
You didn't respond to my question.

Why is Trump's overt racism not a disqualifying factor for him as a presidential candidate?
Click to expand...

As a Mexican American, his judge comment was a bad political move. But judges do have biases (see Supreme Court) and asking, privately, for a new judge would have been the move.

Outside of that, his alleged 'racism' has been overblown.

He talks about illegals, not mexicans.

A temporary Muslim ban is not racist.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
SheSaidNo said:
The article ended with this
Click to expand...

I mean.... Frum arguing that you shouldn't include women or other recent immigrants in the sample seems like insanity because those are also people in the labor market, but Frum writes like ten articles a year about Sharia Law, so I guess it's not as bad as his usual
 
R

Risette

A Good Citizen
Glitchfire said:
He talks about illegals, not mexicans.
Click to expand...
When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.
Click to expand...

"Illegals" is just coded language. And most of the time he doesn't even try to code his language, see above.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
Man, I can't believe I forgot that Frum wrote 4 separate articles defending Harper while Harper ranted about how Muslims were coming to rape your white women and that's why you should make Canada fear again.
 
G

Glitchfire

Banned
TheLostBigBoss said:
*societal norms means passing laws that limit the rights of LGBT's
Click to expand...

If a majority of the people in your state believe LGBT laws should be limited, that should be the law.

Do you not believe in democracy?

I think that gay marriage should be legal, but I also think that democracy comes before anything else.
 
S

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
chiym1992 said:
I assume Kirk will vote for this too (which still won't be enough), but I have a lot of reservations on basing this off those two lists. Especially if people are only able to appeal after they have been denied. I understand we all want some form of gun control, but I would rather be starting from closing the gun show loophole. It's weird to think that the government can take away one of your rights by simply putting you on a list, and you can only appeal until you try to exercise it, even if it's one that I don't agree with at all.
Click to expand...

The lack of an appeal process was my major issue with just assigning the no fly list. Plus, this might actually give people more of an avenue to get off the no fly list maybe?

Glitchfire said:
If a majority of the people in your state believe LGBT laws should be limited, that should be the law.

Do you not believe in democracy?

I think that gay marriage should be legal, but I also think that democracy comes before anything else.
Click to expand...

If the majority of the state wants to allow slavery should they be allowed too?

You have to be trolling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2025 Edition
2
98
7K
digdug2 replied
The "I survived development hell" club (7 years+) of games (2024 edition)
36
3K
Holammer replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5 6
263
52K
Topher replied
Xbox 360 'First Party' dev/pub output DID NOT drop in 2nd half after Kinect, but barely changed. People are likely mixing up TP exclusives with FP.
2 3
148
8K
feynoob replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
61K
DGrayson replied
Top Bottom